Michigan Media

Recent legislation that received a big push from offender advocates have failed to make it through the Michigan legislature that would have retroactively ended the life sentences of murderers who killed when they were teens. Despite some misinformation in the Michigan ACLU campaign messaging and significant turnout from the offenders’ friends and families, the legislation has gone down to defeat.

We encourage offender advocates work to sit down with ALL the stakeholders on this topic before proceeding again.

Jody Robinson Cotaling of Davisburg shows pictures of her brother James, who was murdered in 1990. Robinson Cotaling is upset about a report that recommends abolishing life sentences without parole for people who commit homicides before they turn 18. The Oakland Press/TIM THOMPSON

James Cotaling who was murdered in 1990. His sister Jody Robinson Cotaling of Davisburg, is upset about a report that recommends abolishing life sentences without parole for people who commit homicides before they turn 18. Thursday, May 24, 2012. The Oakland Press/TIM THOMPSON

By ANN ZANIEWSKI

Some families of murder victims are criticizing a report that advocates ending the practice of sentencing young offenders to life in prison without parole.

Jody Robinson Cotaling of Davisburg said the report, “Basic Decency: Protecting the human rights of children,” is flawed, beginning with its name.

“They named it, ‘Basic Decency,’ ” she said. “To us, that is just very demeaning to victims. … We find the use of that very offensive.”

The report recently was released in partnership with the ACLU of Michigan and an advocacy group called Second Chances 4 Youth. It makes a number of recommendations, including abolishing sentences of life without parole for people who commit homicides before they turn 18 and requiring judges to consider a young person’s immaturity, lack of experience and other factors in issuing sentences in such cases.

According to the report, Michigan has the second-highest number of people serving lifetime prison sentences for offenses that occurred before they turned 18.

Members of National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Lifers are critical of the “Basic Decency” report and say they’re working on a page-by-page analysis that will be posted on their website, www.teenkillers.org.

Robinson Cotaling, who is secretary of the group’s Michigan chapter, said the report was filled with “half-truths” and didn’t tell the whole story.

Attorney Deborah LaBelle, principal author of the report and director of the Juvenile Life Without Parole Initiative, stands behind the document.

“The report relied upon objective data obtained from the Michigan Department of Corrections, documented peer review research, the (U.S.) Supreme Court decisions and findings in Graham (v. Florida), and a great deal of records and transcripts,” LaBelle said.

Robinson Cotaling said the section in the report about “brain science” was misrepresented. The report said the brain’s frontal lobe, which is associated with impulse control and understanding consequences, is underdeveloped in adolescents compared with adults. Scientific research has shown that the part of the brain that allows for mature decision-making is not fully developed in teenagers, according to the report.

The report says that to date, 376 young people have been sentenced in Michigan to life without parole.

“Regarding the number of 376 offenders — we demand the list of names,” reads a page on NOVJL’s website that criticizes the report. “First, we know that this includes all the 17-year-old convicted murderers serving life. This report labels them juveniles but under Michigan law (and many other states) 17 is adult age.”

NOVJL’s website says the report’s claim that the U.S. is the only nation in the world to sentence teen killers to life in prison isn’t true, and that the report contains flawed references to court rulings.

LaBelle said the United Nations, Amnesty International and various other sources have recognized that the U.S. is the only country that has such a sentence for youth younger than age 18.

LaBelle said young people who commit serious crimes need to face significant punishment, but there should be a recognition that they are different than adults. She noted that people cannot vote, join the military or get married without parental consent until they turn 18.

“We know that they’re not mature,” LaBelle said when the report was first released. “When they do mature, they’re not always what they were, and they should be given a second chance.”

LaBelle said a main concern is that adults often end up serving less time than juveniles for comparable crimes due to plea bargaining.

The average length of prison time served by an adult who took a plea offer for a first-degree homicide charge was 12.2 years, according to the report. Juveniles are at a disadvantage in negotiating and understanding plea offers because of their immaturity, and they often reject plea offers at a higher rate than adults, the report said.

In Michigan, a conviction of first-degree murder carries a mandatory sentence of life in prison without parole. A conviction of armed robbery or other serious crime that is categorized as a capital offense carries a maximum penalty of life or any term of years in prison.

Prosecutors have the discretion to charge people ages 14 and older as adults in cases involving serious crimes. If someone 14 or older is convicted of first-degree murder, a judge must sentence that person to life in prison without parole if the defendant was charged as an adult.

If someone younger than 14 is charged with a capital offense, the prosecutor can still designate him or her as an adult, but the judge has discretion in sentencing and can sentence that person as a juvenile or an adult, or issue a blended sentence.

Robinson Cotaling’s involvement in the issues surrounding juvenile life without parole sentences grew out of the death of her brother, 28-year-old auto mechanic James Cotaling.

James Cotaling was found stabbed to death in May 1990 in a house in Pontiac. Barbara Hernandez, who was 16 at the time of the killing, and her older boyfriend, James Roy Hyde, were convicted of murder and robbery charges.

They were sentenced to life in prison.

Robinson Cotaling and other members of her family believe Hernandez, who was reported to have posed as a prostitute to lure James Cotaling to the house, was directly involved in the killing. They believe she should stay behind bars for the rest of her life.

Officials with the Michigan Women’s Justice & Clemency Project have filed petitions for clemency on behalf of Hernandez. Carol Jacobsen, director of the Justice & Clemency Project, told The Oakland Press in 2010 that Hernandez had an abusive home life and Hyde preyed upon her. She said Hyde, not Hernandez, was the killer.

When a hearing was held in 2010 on Hernandez’s petition for commutation, James Cotaling’s family urged members of the Michigan Parole and Commutation Board not to consider her for release.

They were thrilled when they got a letter saying that Hernandez had not been granted clemency.

Robinson Cotaling said that while sentences of life without parole might not be an appropriate sentence in every case involving a teenager who killed someone, it should remain an option.

“I will not ever say that the juvenile justice system does not have flaws, and we’re not saying that every single teen killer deserves life without parole,” Robinson Cotaling said.

“We’re saying it needs to stay on the table for the worst of the worst.”

Oakland County woman, sister of juvenile lifer victim, refutes new report’s assertions of disparities in criminal justice system

Published: Wednesday, May 16, 2012, 8:00 AM

File PhotoJody Robinson, of Davisburg, poses for a portrait with the image of her late brother, James Cotaling, as she talks last fall about the effects of her brother’s murder on her and her family.

DAVISBURG, MI — Jody Robinson said she was disheartened by a new report describing a litany of disparities it says has helped place Michigan second in the nation in inmates serving non-parolable life sentences for crimes as minors.

Robinson’s brother, James Cotaling, a 28-year-old auto mechanic, was killed inside a Pontiac house in 1990.

“What about the decency to me?” she said. “Unfortunately, it took me a long time to get over my brother’s death. A few years of therapy, a few years of night terrors. I was traumatized. And unfortunately I’m the one that is now sentenced. I was 18 years old and I had done nothing wrong, yet I’m sentenced to a life sentence of retraumatization of being forced to relive one of the most horrible times in my life.”

Barbara Hernandez, then 16, and her 20-year-old boyfriend, James Roy Hyde, were convicted of luring Cotaling into the Pontiac house two-plus decades ago, killing him and stealing his car. He suffered 25 knife wounds and was nearly decapitated.

Hernandez became one of Michigan’s juvenile lifers. She was denied clemency by Gov. Jennifer Granholm in 2010.

Robinson said people like Hernandez don’t deserve a second chances, contrary to the report, even in cases where juvenile lifers were not convicted of actually pulling a trigger or, in this case, stabbing someone to death.

“She planned my brother’s murder, she bought the knife, then she held him down,” Robinson said. “But she’s an accomplice because she says her boyfriend did it.

“I’m not saying in every single case it’s that way, but I have looked into a few and most cases, it’s not an accomplice like you or I would think. It wasn’t that they drove the car and didn’t really know what was happening. Most of the time, if not for that person the crime could not have been committed.”

“(Activists) say they care about victims, yet they continually say to give our inmates a second chance at life. Do you know how hurtful that is for a victim to hear?” Robinson said. “Where’s my brother’s second chance? He doesn’t get one.”

“I find myself looking at this information and wondering where they come up with their information, because it’s just full of mistruths and misinformation,” she said. “It’s just very upsetting when you read it as a victim or a surviving victim.”

The report says the United States is the only country that sentences juveniles to life without parole. Robinson said that is not true, citing at least 13 other nations that do the same.

Robinson also said the report does not mention recommit rates for paroled offenders, something she called an imperative statistic for consideration.

“It’s just too scary of a figure,” she said. “If you make that mistake and parole somebody, you’re looking at another victim, another death. And to me, the risk is not worth it. I know what it’s like to lose a loved one.”

She also called part of the report detailing the 38 percent of attorneys for juvenile lifers disciplined by the State Bar for ethical violations further propaganda.

“I would like them to go through and do a report on these offenders’ disciplinary records,” Robinson said.

Hernandez has had 17 misconducts over the course of her 20-plus-year incarceration, according to Robinson, including incidents of drug smuggling, attacking a guard and sexual misconduct.

“Yet they feel this person is safe to bring back to society,” Robinson said. “These are the people they are trying to get a second chance.”

Robinson also took issue with the characterization of life-without-parole for juveniles as death sentences.

“Yes, they will eventually die in prison. I get that,” she said. “What I’m disputing is their wording. They’re trying to get people to say, ‘Oh, these poor kids!’

“No. My brother was given a death sentence. He’s no longer here. These offenders get to see their loved ones, call their mothers on Mother’s Day. My brother didn’t get that. Our family didn’t get that.

“It seems like they’re going to keep going until you can kill somebody and get a slap on the wrist, then what kind of society are we going to have?” Robinson said.

Robinson said she and the NOVJL admit the criminal justice system is imperfect, but she said they are not willing to budge on life-without-parole sentence for juveniles.

“It definitely needs to stay on the table, because that’s what some absolutely need,” she said. “Some just need to be locked up for the rest of their life.”

Robinson said she and the NOVJL will sit down for a complete review of the report in the coming days and will be issuing a press release “debunking it.”

“This isn’t about winning or losing. This is about justice,” she said. “Everybody has already lost.”

Editorial: Life terms not cruel

With little public support for its cause, the American Civil Liberties Union went to court last week on behalf of nine murderers. The nine share this in common: They carried out their crimes as teenagers, were tried as adults and are locked up in prison with no chance for parole.

The ACLU says their punishment is cruel and unusual, a constitutional claim that will go before a federal judge.

It is not a new argument: Advocates for teen killers say they are fundamentally different than adults and should not be penalized forever over decisions made by adolescent minds.

We understand the ACLU’s compassion, but we also hope the courts do not tamper with existing law. You can disagree with the possibility of locking away lawbreaking teens for life, but it hardly seems cruel.

Not when you think of the lives these criminals have taken. Not when you consider the pain an early release would cause to families who expected these killers would serve the law’s harshest punishment. Not when you weigh the possibility that they could murder again.

Michigan’s lawmakers have been looking at revising the life-without-parole punishment for young killers. House Bill 4518 would eliminate this penalty, yet it has not gotten out of committee.

The reality is that there is little public call for the justice system to handle young killers differently. Sometimes, they are treated as children and spared prison terms. Other times, judges or juries conclude they truly understood their actions and deserve life in prison.

If that system should change, let it come from the public through its elected officials. The courts should respect Michigan’s just approach to justice.

PRESS COVERAGE – Michigan Associated Press

LANSING, Mich. (AP) _ Michigan inmates locked up with mandatory life sentences for crimes committed before they turned 17 would get a chance at parole under legislation that triggered emotional testimony Wednesday in a packed House committee.

Supporters wore yellow T-shirts that stated, “Save the Children, Vote Second Chance.” Opponents such as victims’ families described horrific crimes committed by teens.

“Young people can be saved, not all of them,” said Rep. Bert Johnson, a Highland Park Democrat and sponsor of one of the bills. “Some young people can in fact be saved.”

But Greg King, whose daughter Karen was kidnapped from a grocery store, raped and murdered in Saginaw County in 1997 while home for the holidays from Michigan State University, opposed giving the parole board an opportunity to free one of her killers.

“Criminals need to know, no matter how old they are, they will be punished to the full extent of the law,” King said as his wife, Linda, wiped away tears. Karen King’s killers were a 15-year-old and his 25-year-old cousin who had been released on parole.

Michigan does not allow parole for juveniles tried as adults and convicted of premeditated murder or felony murder _ a killing committed during the commission of a felony.

The legislation would give current inmates who committed their offenses before age 17 parole eligibility after serving 15 years. The parole board would not have to release them, though. Future offenders under 17 also could no longer get life with no chance of parole under the bills.

The Democratic-led House Judiciary Committee is expected to vote May 27 after hearing more testimony on that date. Similar legislation was passed by the House late last legislative session but is expected to hit opposition in the Republican-controlled Senate if it clears the House this time around.

On one side of the debate Wednesday were groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan along with relatives of juvenile offenders serving mandatory life without parole. On the other side were victims’ families and prosecutors.

Advocates said juveniles are not as mature as adults but unfairly receive the same punishment for crimes committed before they are old enough to vote. Michigan is one of 11 states to automatically consider 17-year-olds adults for criminal purposes.

Paul Stankewitz, public policy associate for the Michigan Catholic Conference, said juveniles should at least get a chance later in life to prove they are worthy of release.

“Michigan is failing to promote genuine rehabilitation,” he said.

Jennifer Bishop-Jenkins, a co-founder of the National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Lifers, said the legislation has re-traumatized victims’ families who were promised the perpetrators would never be freed. She said the criminals still get to live and see their loved ones who visit them in prison.

Victims “don’t get second chances,” said Bishop-Jenkins, whose sister, her sister’s husband and their baby were killed by a 16-year-old in Illinois in 1990.

She said lawmakers should focus on prospective measures and not make proposals that would be retroactive and disrupt the lives of victims’ families. She noted that Gov. Jennifer Granholm already has the power to commute a life sentence.

A 2005 study by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International showed Michigan had the second-highest rate of imposing life sentences without parole on juveniles.

Michigan has at least 158 prisoners sentenced to life without parole for crimes committed before they turned 17, according to ACLU research. At least 32 were sentenced for felony murder regardless of whether they pulled the trigger, leading critics to argue there is not enough case-by-case flexibility for children tried as adults.”

OpEd/Letter Submitted to Detroit Free Press by NOVJL

ED NOTE: A reporter from the Detroit Free Press has led the paper’s “campaign” against JLWOP – a seeming violation of journalistic objectivity – but explained by the fact that his brother is a JLWOP incarcerated offender. We submitted this to them in the hopes that they might publish something from the victim perspective. If the paper does not publish this, we will express concern in a more public fashion about the questionable “agenda” by this major newspaper.

I searched Jeff Gerritt’s piecee (May 3) on juvenile life without parole in vain for the word “victim.”

No luck. The word “victim” was absent, as was any mention of the victims of the crimes that resulted in life without parole sentences.

These crimes had victims. Each victim had a family, people left devastated in the wake of the brutalization of their loved ones.

Now Gerritt proposes that innocent victims and their families be stripped of the justice and finality they were promised and forced to undergo parole hearings every two years for the rest of their lives or the rest of the perpetrator’s life, unless the thing those families fear most happens: the criminal is let out on the streets.

Perpetrators of brutal crimes chose the consequence of life without parole when they chose to prey on the innocent. Victims of those predators did not choose their fate; it was foisted upon them.

That is why victims and the perpetrators of the crimes against them are inextricably linked. You cannot change the sentences of one without affecting the other.

Which brings us to justice and morality. Is it just to trade the life sentence of a violent offender and impose it instead on innocent victims and their families, sentencing them to parole hearings where they relive the crime over and over? Is it moral to even consider retroactively changing sentences in serious violent crimes without ensuring that all victims and their families have been given notice and an opportunity to be heard?

Gerritt tells the tale of one convicted murderer. I can match him in horror stories. Imagine you are Jody Robinson of White Lake, Michigan. You’re 18 years old and ready to celebrate your senior prom and high school graduation. Instead, your life is frozen in grief when your big brother Jimmy is killed on his way to buying your mom a Mother’s Day card. He is stabbed so many times that he is nearly decapitated.

Jody Robinson doesn’t want the murderers who slashed her brother to death to have a second chance to kill. Neither should the rest of us.”

Juvenile lifer law change adds to pain for victims

GUEST OPINION – JODY ROBINSON

To those who support the proposed legislation that would abolish juvenile life without parole, you need to know the truth of what these bills would do.

The Bills STOP judges from handing down a sentence of life without parole to anyone under the age of 18 regardless of how serious or heinous the crime. They also allow a parole hearing after serving only 10 years.

The bills would be retroactive, so anyone younger than 18 at the time of their conviction serving a sentence of life without the possibility of parole after 10 years are granted a parole hearing and possibly set free.

What does that do?

It simply transfers a life sentence from the murderer to the victims who have lost a love one. Victims would be sentenced to a life of parole hearings, made to relive the most horrific and painful time in their life. Victims that were giving justice and hopefully some peace would now be thrown into a never-ending nightmare. The worst part, advocates supporting this legislation pay little regard to those MOST impacted, the victims who never see legislation, appeals, parole or a second chance given to their dead loved ones.

The National Organization of Victims Of Juvenile Lifers feels all victims should be notified prior to any change in legislation. And that’s not by a parole hearing notice or meeting their loved one’s killer at the local market.

Kary Moss of the American Civil Liberties Union, stated that “Michigan law dictates mandatory sentencing to life … even for kids who were not the murderer but drove the getaway car. Life without parole is the harshest sentence available in Michigan for any crime, and we dole it out to children with no discussion about maturity, culpability or judicial discretion.”

First, ANYONE knows a 16-year-old would never want to be called or considered a child.

Second, they imply ALL young offenders get a mandatory life sentences. This is simply NOT true.

Yes, if through a court hearing the juvenile is found to have the maturity, culpability and judicial discretion of an adult, then life is mandatory.

Fact, In the case of my brother’s murder, we sat through hearings to determine that the teenager could be tried as an adult, a culpability hearing and, once the verdict was given — guilty of first degree premeditated murder — they held another hearing to determine that the accused could be sentenced as an adult. Three hearings and a trial is not a mandatory forced decision. Doctors, judges and lawyers evaluated the circumstances and made intelligent recommendations. I admit, not all juveniles go through the same process. A reasonable legislative change would be a mandatory determination hearing of ALL juveniles accused of a felony. Last year these bills passed in the House but failed in the Senate. The House is planning another hearing on May 6. I urge anyone who does not want these bills passed to contact your state legislatures and me at no2ndchancesMI@aol. com or www.jlwopvictims.org. Changes of this magnitude would greatly jeopardize the safety of everyone, not just the victim’s family.

Jody Robinson of Davisburg is the cofounder of the National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Lifers.

GUEST OPINION – JODY ROBINSON

To those who support the proposed legislation that would abolish juvenile life without parole, you need to know the truth of what these bills would do.

The Bills STOP judges from handing down a sentence of life without parole to anyone under the age of 18 regardless of how serious or heinous the crime. They also allow a parole hearing after serving only 10 years.

The bills would be retroactive, so anyone younger than 18 at the time of their conviction serving a sentence of life without the possibility of parole after 10 years are granted a parole hearing and possibly set free.

What does that do?

It simply transfers a life sentence from the murderer to the victims who have lost a love one. Victims would be sentenced to a life of parole hearings, made to relive the most horrific and painful time in their life. Victims that were giving justice and hopefully some peace would now be thrown into a never-ending nightmare. The worst part, advocates supporting this legislation pay little regard to those MOST impacted, the victims who never see legislation, appeals, parole or a second chance given to their dead loved ones.

The National Organization of Victims Of Juvenile Lifers feels all victims should be notified prior to any change in legislation. And that’s not by a parole hearing notice or meeting their loved one’s killer at the local market.

Kary Moss of the American Civil Liberties Union, stated that “Michigan law dictates mandatory sentencing to life … even for kids who were not the murderer but drove the getaway car. Life without parole is the harshest sentence available in Michigan for any crime, and we dole it out to children with no discussion about maturity, culpability or judicial discretion.”

First, ANYONE knows a 16-year-old would never want to be called or considered a child.

Second, they imply ALL young offenders get a mandatory life sentences. This is simply NOT true.

Yes, if through a court hearing the juvenile is found to have the maturity, culpability and judicial discretion of an adult, then life is mandatory.

Fact, In the case of my brother’s murder, we sat through hearings to determine that the teenager could be tried as an adult, a culpability hearing and, once the verdict was given — guilty of first degree premeditated murder — they held another hearing to determine that the accused could be sentenced as an adult. Three hearings and a trial is not a mandatory forced decision. Doctors, judges and lawyers evaluated the circumstances and made intelligent recommendations. I admit, not all juveniles go through the same process. A reasonable legislative change would be a mandatory determination hearing of ALL juveniles accused of a felony. Last year these bills passed in the House but failed in the Senate. The House is planning another hearing on May 6. I urge anyone who does not want these bills passed to contact your state legislatures and me at no2ndchancesMI@aol. com or www.jlwopvictims.org. Changes of this magnitude would greatly jeopardize the safety of everyone, not just the victim’s family.

Jody Robinson of Davisburg is the cofounder of the National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Lifers.

LOCAL ATTORNEYS WEIGH IN – SHOULD JUVENILE KILLERS RECEIVE LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE?

Jackson County Legal News

David Lady

By Tom Gantert, Legal News

Jackson County Michigan Prosecutor Mark Blumer says in some respects, he would consider himself to be a liberal prosecutor.

But Blumer doesn’t shy away from his belief that some juveniles as young as 15 should be charged as adults in heinous crimes.

“I’m one of those people who believes there is such a thing as a hopelessly vicious juvenile who can only be treated appropriately by the adult court system,” Blumer said.

An ACLU-Michigan 2012 report released this month on juvenile sentencing is highlighting the law that requires sentencing people between the ages of 14 and 17 convicted of an offense involving a first-degree homicide to life in prison without the opportunity for parole.

Blumer said prosecutors don’t have to charge juveniles as adults, but believes they should retain the right to do so.

“And I think it is appropriate,” he said. “We make the initial determination on primarily two factors – the criminal history of the individual at the time of the new crime and also the circumstances of the crime itself.”

“Just because these kids are 15 and 16 years old, doesn’t mean they can’t have an adult viciousness already established and it has to be treated as so by the court system.”

The ACLU reports that 371 youths have been sentenced to life without the possibility of parole in Michigan.

“As parents, teachers and older siblings, we inherently understand that kids are fundamentally different than adults,” said Deborah LaBelle, the principal author of the ACLU report, in a statement. “They are impulsive, inexperienced, vulnerable to mistreatment, and are not able to easily escape or cope with abuse and other trauma. While there is no denying that youth must be held accountable for actions, as a state, we can do better than sentencing them to die in prison.”

But the National Organization of Victims (NOVJL) of Juvenile Lifers, which has a Michigan office in Davisburg debunked much of the ACLU report at their website, www.teen killers. org.

“Advocates for the offenders have misrepresented the brain science, the number of offenders serving this sentence, and worst of all, often the very facts of these horrific crimes,” said NOVJL President Jennifer Bishop Jenkins, in a statement. “Victims’ families have been re-traumatized by the offender’s versions of these crimes in their crusade across the nation. They use phrases like ‘children sentenced to die in prison’–nothing could be further from the truth. The fact is–the only people in this scenario with the death sentence were our murdered loved ones.

Retroactively undoing a natural life sentence for murder, as the ACLU is proposing, poses not only public safety risks and legal costs for the taxpayers, but also challenges to victims’ families and their rights to due process, Jenkins said.

“While we believe natural life sentences for murder should always be rare–no matter the age of the offender – it is sadly true that there are some people who are so dangerous that they can never be allowed to walk among us,” she said. “Victims deserve legal finality. They deserve not to have to spend the rest of their lives attending parole hearings, fighting the release of their loved ones’ killers. If the offender, no matter their age, young or old, shows profound culpability and heinousness in an aggravated homicide or multiple homicides, and they are not likely to ever be deemed safe for release, a natural life sentence is entirely appropriate.”

Blumer recalled a 15 year-old rapist whom he considered “hopelessly vicious” and certain to remain so.

“That doesn’t mean that all juveniles that commit these crimes are that way,” he said.

David Lady, a prosecutor for 30 years before becoming a defense attorney seven years ago, said he doesn’t have a problem with charging some juveniles as adults.

In one crime in Jackson County, Lady said a juvenile stabbed and killed a neighbor girl until the knife broke off in her body. Then the juvenile went and got another knife. The killer was convicted of second-degree murder and given life in prison and will be eligible for parole.

“There are unfortunately some very hardened young people in that bracket that the juvenile system cannot handle,” Lady said. “There are also some in that age range that commit such brutal and horrible crimes that they simply must be segregated from society.”

Jackson attorney Brad Brelinski said the issue is a difficult one.

“I don’t know what the answer is,” he said. “My concerns are you are dealing with a child. And every child is different. So when there is discretion available on how a child is treated, it seems like there is room for error. When you are talking about someone’s liberty for the rest of their life … that is an extreme responsibility.”

Washtenaw Legal News coverage of the issue in Michigan:

ATTORNEYS WEIGH IN ON JUVENILE SENTENCES

By Jo Mathis & Tom Gantert

Judge Joe Burke says there are many things he misses about being a prosecutor.

But deciding whether to charge juveniles as adults is not one of them.

”It was terribly difficult, for all the reasons you might imagine,” said Burke, who was an assistant prosecutor in Washtenaw County before he was appointed to the 15th District Court in Ann Arbor several months ago.

An ACLU-Michigan 2012 report released this month on juvenile sentencing is highlighting the law that requires sentencing people between the ages of 14 and 17 convicted of an offense involving a first-degree homicide to life in prison without the opportunity for parole.

Jackson County Prosecutor Mark Blumer said prosecutors don’t have to charge juveniles as adults, but believes they should retain the right to do so.

“And I think it is appropriate,” he said. “We make the initial determination on primarily two factors–the criminal history of the individual at the time of the new crime and also the circumstances of the crime itself.”

Blumer believes that some juveniles as young as 15 should be charged as adults in heinous crimes.

“I’m one of those people who believes there is such a thing as a hopelessly vicious juvenile who can only be treated appropriately by the adult court system,” Blumer said.

Blumer recalled a 15 year-old rapist whom he considered “hopelessly vicious” and certain to remain so.

“That doesn’t mean that all juveniles that commit these crimes are that way,” he said. “Just because these kids are 15 and 16 years old, doesn’t mean they can’t have an adult viciousness already established and it has to be treated as so by the court system.”

The 38-page ACLU report noted the fiscal and human costs of juvenile life without parole sentences, and noted that Michigan incarcerates the second highest number of people serving life sentences without parole for crimes committed when they were 17 or younger.

“As parents, teachers and older siblings, we inherently understand that kids are fundamentally different than adults,” said Deborah LaBelle, the principal author of the ACLU report, in a statement. “They are impulsive, inexperienced, vulnerable to mistreatment, and are not able to easily escape or cope with abuse and other trauma. While there is no denying that youth must be held accountable for actions, as a state, we can do better than sentencing them to die in prison.”

But the National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Lifers (NOVJL), with a Michigan branch in Davisburg, debunked much of the ACLU report.

“Advocates for the offenders have misrepresented the brain science, the number of offenders serving this sentence, and worst of all, often the very facts of these horrific crimes,” said NOVJL President Jennifer Bishop Jenkins, in a statement. “Victims’ families have been re-traumatized by the offender’s versions of these crimes in their crusade across the nation. They use phrases like ‘children sentenced to die in prison’–nothing could be further from the truth. The fact is–the only people in this scenario with the death sentence were our murdered loved ones.”

In a telephone interview with The Legal News from her Chicago office, Jenkins said the Michigan ACLU has a habit of interviewing criminals and simply believing their stories, no questions asked.

“This is why we went after this report–I’ve never done this in any other state,” said Jenkins, whose sister, sister’s husband and their baby were murdered by a teenager in suburban Chicago 22 years ago.

Jenkins said natural life sentences for murder should always be rare, but that an offender of any age deserves a natural life sentence if they show profound culpability and heinousness in an aggravated homicide or multiple homicides, and are not likely to ever be deemed safe for release.

Ann Arbor criminal defense attorney Steve Tramontin says the harshest results seem to occur when a juvenile is charged and convicted as an adult with first-degree felony murder, which is when a homicide occurs during the commission of a felony.

“The defendant need not be the principal actor, or in some cases even physically present during the killing, to be held criminally liable under an aiding and abetting theory,” said Tramontin. “The offense carries a mandatory life sentence. Advising any defendant that they can be held responsible for a murder that they did not plan, or physically commit, is difficult. The challenge is even greater when representing juveniles who often lack the maturity and life experience to accept a plea offer carrying far less dire consequences.”

David Lady, a prosecutor for 30 years before becoming a defense attorney seven years ago, said he doesn’t have a problem with charging some juveniles as adults.

In one crime in Jackson County, Lady said a juvenile stabbed and killed a neighbor girl until the knife broke off in her body. Then the juvenile went and got another knife. The killer was convicted of second-degree murder and given life in prison and will be eligible for parole.

“There are unfortunately some very hardened young people in that bracket that the juvenile system cannot handle,” Lady said. “There are also some in that age range that commit such brutal and horrible crimes that they simply must be segregated from society.”

Washtenaw District Court Judge Chris Easthope, who doesn’t sentence juveniles in any capacity, said that judges use discretion when available and appropriate.

“While I’m sure there are many Circuit Court Judges that may or may not agree with the practice, those judges understand that charging a juvenile as an adult is completely within the discretion of the executive branch, and the sentencing guidelines are a function of the legislative branch,” he said.

The issue is a difficult one, said Jackson attorney Brad Brelinski.

“I don’t know what the answer is,” he said. “My concerns are you are dealing with a child. And every child is different. So when there is discretion available on how a child is treated, it seems like there is room for error. When you are talking about someone’s liberty for the rest of their life … that is an extreme responsibility.”

Best Book To Help Murder Victims Family Members

Adult Time for Adult Crimes

“Brain Overclaim Syndrome” by Professor Stephen J. Morse of UPenn Law

Victims Families at the Supreme Court

Harvard Professor James Q. Wilson “Thinking About Crime”:

". . . some persons will shun crime even if we do nothing to deter them, while others will seek it out even if we do everything to reform them. Wicked people exist. Nothing avails except to set them apart from innocent people. And many people, neither wicked nor innocent, but watchful, dissembling, and calculating of their opportunities, ponder our reaction to wickedness as a cue to what they might profitably do. We have trifled with the wicked, made sport of the innocent, and encouraged the calculators. Justice suffers, and so do we all."